ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards: Perspectives and recommendations from emergency medicine educators

Stephen J. Wolf, Saadia Akhtar, Eric Gross, David Barnes, Michael Epter, Jonathan Fisher, Maria Moreira, Michael Smith, Hans House

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction: The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) and the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) were invited to contribute to the 2016 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education’s (ACGME) Second Resident Duty Hours in the Learning and Working Environment Congress. We describe the joint process used by ACEP and CORD to capture the opinions of emergency medicine (EM) educators on the ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards, formulate recommendations, and inform subsequent congressional testimony. Methods: In 2016 our joint working group of experts in EM medical education conducted a consensus-based, mixed-methods process using survey data from medical education stakeholders in EM and expert iterative discussions to create organizational position statements and recommendations for revisions of work hour standards. A 19-item survey was administered to a convenience sample of 199 EM residency training programs using a national EM educational listserv. Results: A total of 157 educational leaders responded to the survey; 92 of 157 could be linked to specific programs, yielding a targeted response rate of 46.2% (92/199) of programs. Respondents commented on the impact of clinical and educational work-hour standards on patient safety, programmatic and personnel costs, resident caseload, and educational experience. Using survey results, comments, and iterative discussions, organizational recommendations were crafted and submitted to the ACGME. Conclusion: EM educators believe that ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards negatively impact the learning environment and are not optimal for promoting patient safety or the development of resident professional citizenship. [West J Emerg Med. 2018;19(1)49-58].

LanguageEnglish (US)
Pages49-58
Number of pages10
JournalWestern Journal of Emergency Medicine
Volume19
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Graduate Medical Education
Emergency Medicine
Accreditation
Patient Safety
Internship and Residency
Medical Education
Joints
Learning
Consensus
Emergencies
Surveys and Questionnaires
Physicians
Education
Costs and Cost Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Emergency Medicine

Cite this

ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards : Perspectives and recommendations from emergency medicine educators. / Wolf, Stephen J.; Akhtar, Saadia; Gross, Eric; Barnes, David; Epter, Michael; Fisher, Jonathan; Moreira, Maria; Smith, Michael; House, Hans.

In: Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 19, No. 1, 01.01.2018, p. 49-58.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Wolf, Stephen J. ; Akhtar, Saadia ; Gross, Eric ; Barnes, David ; Epter, Michael ; Fisher, Jonathan ; Moreira, Maria ; Smith, Michael ; House, Hans. / ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards : Perspectives and recommendations from emergency medicine educators. In: Western Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2018 ; Vol. 19, No. 1. pp. 49-58.
@article{35510b7b25b5464f98ce65cfb9e949f5,
title = "ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards: Perspectives and recommendations from emergency medicine educators",
abstract = "Introduction: The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) and the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) were invited to contribute to the 2016 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education’s (ACGME) Second Resident Duty Hours in the Learning and Working Environment Congress. We describe the joint process used by ACEP and CORD to capture the opinions of emergency medicine (EM) educators on the ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards, formulate recommendations, and inform subsequent congressional testimony. Methods: In 2016 our joint working group of experts in EM medical education conducted a consensus-based, mixed-methods process using survey data from medical education stakeholders in EM and expert iterative discussions to create organizational position statements and recommendations for revisions of work hour standards. A 19-item survey was administered to a convenience sample of 199 EM residency training programs using a national EM educational listserv. Results: A total of 157 educational leaders responded to the survey; 92 of 157 could be linked to specific programs, yielding a targeted response rate of 46.2{\%} (92/199) of programs. Respondents commented on the impact of clinical and educational work-hour standards on patient safety, programmatic and personnel costs, resident caseload, and educational experience. Using survey results, comments, and iterative discussions, organizational recommendations were crafted and submitted to the ACGME. Conclusion: EM educators believe that ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards negatively impact the learning environment and are not optimal for promoting patient safety or the development of resident professional citizenship. [West J Emerg Med. 2018;19(1)49-58].",
author = "Wolf, {Stephen J.} and Saadia Akhtar and Eric Gross and David Barnes and Michael Epter and Jonathan Fisher and Maria Moreira and Michael Smith and Hans House",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5811/westjem.2017.11.35265",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "49--58",
journal = "Western Journal of Emergency Medicine",
issn = "1936-900X",
publisher = "University of California",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards

T2 - Western Journal of Emergency Medicine

AU - Wolf, Stephen J.

AU - Akhtar, Saadia

AU - Gross, Eric

AU - Barnes, David

AU - Epter, Michael

AU - Fisher, Jonathan

AU - Moreira, Maria

AU - Smith, Michael

AU - House, Hans

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Introduction: The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) and the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) were invited to contribute to the 2016 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education’s (ACGME) Second Resident Duty Hours in the Learning and Working Environment Congress. We describe the joint process used by ACEP and CORD to capture the opinions of emergency medicine (EM) educators on the ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards, formulate recommendations, and inform subsequent congressional testimony. Methods: In 2016 our joint working group of experts in EM medical education conducted a consensus-based, mixed-methods process using survey data from medical education stakeholders in EM and expert iterative discussions to create organizational position statements and recommendations for revisions of work hour standards. A 19-item survey was administered to a convenience sample of 199 EM residency training programs using a national EM educational listserv. Results: A total of 157 educational leaders responded to the survey; 92 of 157 could be linked to specific programs, yielding a targeted response rate of 46.2% (92/199) of programs. Respondents commented on the impact of clinical and educational work-hour standards on patient safety, programmatic and personnel costs, resident caseload, and educational experience. Using survey results, comments, and iterative discussions, organizational recommendations were crafted and submitted to the ACGME. Conclusion: EM educators believe that ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards negatively impact the learning environment and are not optimal for promoting patient safety or the development of resident professional citizenship. [West J Emerg Med. 2018;19(1)49-58].

AB - Introduction: The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) and the Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors (CORD) were invited to contribute to the 2016 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education’s (ACGME) Second Resident Duty Hours in the Learning and Working Environment Congress. We describe the joint process used by ACEP and CORD to capture the opinions of emergency medicine (EM) educators on the ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards, formulate recommendations, and inform subsequent congressional testimony. Methods: In 2016 our joint working group of experts in EM medical education conducted a consensus-based, mixed-methods process using survey data from medical education stakeholders in EM and expert iterative discussions to create organizational position statements and recommendations for revisions of work hour standards. A 19-item survey was administered to a convenience sample of 199 EM residency training programs using a national EM educational listserv. Results: A total of 157 educational leaders responded to the survey; 92 of 157 could be linked to specific programs, yielding a targeted response rate of 46.2% (92/199) of programs. Respondents commented on the impact of clinical and educational work-hour standards on patient safety, programmatic and personnel costs, resident caseload, and educational experience. Using survey results, comments, and iterative discussions, organizational recommendations were crafted and submitted to the ACGME. Conclusion: EM educators believe that ACGME clinical and educational work hour standards negatively impact the learning environment and are not optimal for promoting patient safety or the development of resident professional citizenship. [West J Emerg Med. 2018;19(1)49-58].

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041049770&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041049770&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5811/westjem.2017.11.35265

DO - 10.5811/westjem.2017.11.35265

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 49

EP - 58

JO - Western Journal of Emergency Medicine

JF - Western Journal of Emergency Medicine

SN - 1936-900X

IS - 1

ER -